> On 11/9/12 12:38 PM, edmund ronald wrote:
> > This discussion started with Gnu Octave. Octave is an interpreter, so
> > there are no downstream products.
> Not quite true. Octave also has headers and libraries, and people can
> write utilities that build against those, and any distribution would
> necessarily involve Octave's license.
> In what way can Apple's shenanigans on
> > OS X create issues for users here? They are executing their code
> on the
> > same non-free machine it was compiled on, and they have already agreed
> > to said non-free environment.
> I agree there is an issue, but OS X seems to be a poisoned well anyway
> from the point of view of free software; I don't think any reasonable
> amount of precautions could work against the world's most litigious
> company. So maybe a warning is what is really required - I would suggest
> "by abiding by the terms of the Xcode license you are violating the GPL
> ***if you redistribute any results of the compilation***, and your
> license to Octave would be cancelled. And maybe this is exactly what the
> bright legal minds at Apple want.